But Origin for Mac will offer additional value to gamers who play on both PC and Mac devices: dual-platform play for select EA titles. With dual-platform play, gamers will buy a game once and be able to download it for both PC and Mac (if the game is available for both platforms). After purchasing the game via Origin on one platform, as soon as a player logs into their other device, the game will appear ready for download in the Origin “My Games” tab.

“Our vision with Origin is to connect your gaming universe online, and today we’re taking a major step in expanding our service to reach Mac-based gamers worldwide,” said Michael Blank, Vice President of Production for Origin at EA. “In delivering great game content, connecting the Origin service across PC, Mac and iOS devices, and offering great value to gamers with dual-platform play on select EA titles, Origin is making it easier than ever before for gamers to connect and play anytime, anywhere.”

Origin for Mac launches with a catalogue of hit titles from EA and publishing partners available for immediate purchase and download, including Dragon Age™ 2, Batman: Arkham City, LEGO Harry Potter and The Sims™ 3. In a special launch offer and to celebrate more than a decade of The Sims, players can enjoy huge savings across The Sims 3 franchise on Origin. The Sims anniversary sale gives players a chance to download The Sims 3 base game, plus numerous expansion and stuff packs via the new Origin for Mac application for as little as $10. These ‘simtastic’ savings on Origin are available for a limited time, so players should act fast.

yuastnav wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 18:24:Um, no. Something like that should not even be worth mentioning since any decent publisher/developer will do that anyway, without saying.I don't want to sound like an entitled bastard but this is usually, or at least should be, standard practice with software and EA should not be praised for doing something exceptional. It should be merely acknowledged that they didn't feth it up this time.

No, that's bullshit. I agree that pay-once-play-anywhere is a good thing for customers, but it's wrong to claim that this has been historically the norm in the video game space. I've always had IBM-compatibles under the desk but was using a Mac laptop in the last decade, and I had to buy a bunch of games twice as distinct Windows and Mac versions, often from separate publishers even. And even in the digital distribution age I've sometimes had to license for different platforms separately. Heck, we're having this problem with iOS vs. Android now, too.

That doesn't mean we need to be grateful to EA for doing the right thing, of course - I don't think customers would let them get away with anything else, considering Steam and GOG do it this way.

There are several meanings to what I said.It either means that this has been historically the norm, which I actually did not had in mind when I wrote that, or it means that there are not a lot of decent developers/publishers.I can name a few developers (and their software), whom I respect but who did not follow that practice. On the other hand there are also some who do it for free.

It's just what I expect from software developers and when that doesn't happen it sucks. Nothing that can be done about that.

Quboid wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 20:12:That search comes up with nothing. I presume it's a regional limitation, rather than the oddest argument ever.

lol - I didn't even click on the link - guess I should have! Now that I have... Those aren't virtual copies, they are physical copies. There is no option to buy it through the Origin online store, just physical copies for all 3 platforms (of which 2 are out of stock).

Bhruic wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 16:02:Really, they are doing nothing more than what Valve did - tie their games to their distribution system. If anyone things Valve would do things any different today, they are nuts.

Very funny, since Valve isn't exactly in the position of starting out their service. If Valve were starting up Steam today, they'd almost certainly do it the same way they did it originally (although, frankly, they don't have a popular enough game these days to pull if off).

Also you can buy almost every EA game on every service except Steam, so it's not like there's no choice.

Bhruic wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 16:02:Really, they are doing nothing more than what Valve did - tie their games to their distribution system. If anyone things Valve would do things any different today, they are nuts.

yuastnav wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 18:24:Um, no. Something like that should not even be worth mentioning since any decent publisher/developer will do that anyway, without saying.I don't want to sound like an entitled bastard but this is usually, or at least should be, standard practice with software and EA should not be praised for doing something exceptional. It should be merely acknowledged that they didn't feth it up this time.

No, that's bullshit. I agree that pay-once-play-anywhere is a good thing for customers, but it's wrong to claim that this has been historically the norm in the video game space. I've always had IBM-compatibles under the desk but was using a Mac laptop in the last decade, and I had to buy a bunch of games twice as distinct Windows and Mac versions, often from separate publishers even. And even in the digital distribution age I've sometimes had to license for different platforms separately. Heck, we're having this problem with iOS vs. Android now, too.

That doesn't mean we need to be grateful to EA for doing the right thing, of course - I don't think customers would let them get away with anything else, considering Steam and GOG do it this way.

Beelzebud wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 13:08:Maybe some day they'll do a Linux client, so then I can not use it on three platforms!

FWIW, from a tech POV they made the smart decision to write Origin using the Qt and other cross-platform libraries, so they likely had their eyes set on portability from the get-go. If they ever wanted to and actually had product to peddle on Linux, deploying it there would be considerably easier than porting Steam was.

Bhruic wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 16:02:My annoyance is with the people who kneejerk "EA bad!" for everything they do. I don't love EA. I don't particularily like EA. I agree that EA does lots of scummy things. But sometimes they do decent things,

Since when? name one!

How about from the quote up above?With dual-platform play, gamers will buy a game once and be able to download it for both PC and Mac (if the game is available for both platforms). After purchasing the game via Origin on one platform, as soon as a player logs into their other device, the game will appear ready for download in the Origin “My Games” tab.

Allowing people to buy the game once and play it on both systems is a pretty decent move on EA's part.

Um, no. Something like that should not even be worth mentioning since any decent publisher/developer will do that anyway, without saying.I don't want to sound like an entitled bastard but this is usually, or at least should be, standard practice with software and EA should not be praised for doing something exceptional. It should be merely acknowledged that they didn't feth it up this time.

Bhruic wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 16:02:My annoyance is with the people who kneejerk "EA bad!" for everything they do. I don't love EA. I don't particularily like EA. I agree that EA does lots of scummy things. But sometimes they do decent things,

Since when? name one!

How about from the quote up above?With dual-platform play, gamers will buy a game once and be able to download it for both PC and Mac (if the game is available for both platforms). After purchasing the game via Origin on one platform, as soon as a player logs into their other device, the game will appear ready for download in the Origin “My Games” tab.

Allowing people to buy the game once and play it on both systems is a pretty decent move on EA's part.

Quboid wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 14:59:I understand people not liking how EA goes about making money and if I'd known about the always-on requirement at the time, I wouldn't have preordered Simcity. However, deger's attitude is just naive.

My annoyance is with the people who kneejerk "EA bad!" for everything they do. I don't love EA. I don't particularily like EA. I agree that EA does lots of scummy things. But sometimes they do decent things,

Quboid wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 14:59:I understand people not liking how EA goes about making money and if I'd known about the always-on requirement at the time, I wouldn't have preordered Simcity. However, deger's attitude is just naive.

My annoyance is with the people who kneejerk "EA bad!" for everything they do. I don't love EA. I don't particularily like EA. I agree that EA does lots of scummy things. But sometimes they do decent things, and rather than laugh at them when they do, I'd rather encourage them so they continue to do more.

Really, they are doing nothing more than what Valve did - tie their games to their distribution system. If anyone things Valve would do things any different today, they are nuts. They've put a lot of time and money into getting even 3rd party developers/publishers to tie their products to Steam.

Yes, I would consider Valve to be a "better" company than EA, but jumping over EA for doing something that you ignore in other companies just demonstrates a personal bias, not anything wrong with EA.

Greed still exists in the pursuit of capitalism, tying it into a job description doesn't negate the acts used to justify it. Sorry to get all political but I see that one come up frequently and it bugs me. The pursuit of wealth and success in the market place and the roles of corporations themselves are things that has been considerably perverted over the past 30 years.

I don't see anything wrong with calling a corporation greedy, it really depends on what they're actually doing.

Quboid wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 12:13:I can understand wanting EA games on Steam and I can understand not liking Origin's T&C but I can't understand why it's unreasonable for EA to not want to give a competitor a slice of their cash.

By the same token it's reasonable for gamers not to like this, since the endpoint is every publisher setting up their own competing service with nothing available on anyone else's DD platform. It would be better for us if EA continued releasing games on Steam as well as Origin, so you can't expect people to cheer them on, either. It's not like we have any vested interest in EA maximizing their profits.

Yes, that's fair. However, accusing a multi-billion dollar company of being greedy is just ridiculous. You know what happens to the CEO of a huge company who isn't obsessed with making money? He gets kicked out of his office at the next AGM and replaced with someone who is.

I understand people not liking how EA goes about making money and if I'd known about the always-on requirement at the time, I wouldn't have preordered Simcity. However, deger's attitude is just naive.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

They could just price their games higher on Steam but continue releasing them there. At least then people would have options. I don't want to buy things from 10 different places but that is what they're trying to do. I get where they are coming from in maximizing profits but as a buyer I just don't give a fuck, I want convenience from digital games, that's the whole point of the market.

Quboid wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 12:13:I can understand wanting EA games on Steam and I can understand not liking Origin's T&C but I can't understand why it's unreasonable for EA to not want to give a competitor a slice of their cash.

By the same token it's reasonable for gamers not to like this, since the endpoint is every publisher setting up their own competing service with nothing available on anyone else's DD platform. It would be better for us if EA continued releasing games on Steam as well as Origin, so you can't expect people to cheer them on, either. It's not like we have any vested interest in EA maximizing their profits.

deqer wrote on Feb 8, 2013, 11:06:because Origin is doing so well, it's time to spread it over to other operating systems now? ... No. But, go ahead anyways, right? It's your Origin product; and it must survive. You have big plans for Origin, don't you? So, nothing will stop you from spreading it, even though the stats clearly show you that people don't like it/want it.

I can understand wanting EA games on Steam and I can understand not liking Origin's T&C but I can't understand why it's unreasonable for EA to not want to give a competitor a slice of their cash.

It's not like Origin is that bad, from a technical point of view. It's nearly as good as Steam in that it's nearly as good as just staying the hell out of my way. It typically uses less RAM than Steam, although for some reason it is using more right now.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke